Delhi Court September 2006 Judgments

Munish Kumar S/O Late Shri Om Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By this O.A., applicant has sought direction to the respondents to grant appointment to the applicant on compassionate grounds, as he was already selected by the Board of Officers and to pay him full back wages from 1.12.1998 till date.2. The brief facts, as alleged by the applicant, are that his father late Shri Om Prakash, who was serving as Mate (MTD) in M.T. Section of the office of the Garrison Engineer (North), Meerut Cantt, died in harness on 8.6.1998 leaving behind his widow and applicant among other children. Since they were in great financial hardship, his mother gave an application for grant of compassionate appointment. Applicant appeared before the Board of Officers which interviewed him on 1.12.1998 and found him eligible for compassionate appointment in Class 'D'. Even though he was duly selected but the staff of Respondent No. 4 got another individual appointed in place of applicant by accepting bribe of Rs. 25,000/- from one Smt. Shahida, widow of late Mumtaz Ahmed...

Dr. Ritu Sharma D/O Shri R.N. Vs. Gtb Hospital (Through Its Medical

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Learned proxy counsel for respondents, at this stage, after arguing the matter at length, states that matter may be adjourned. Request is turned down.2. Applicant, through this OA, challenges an order passed by the respondents whereby her request for payment of wages from 26.11.2004 till 20.1.2005 has been turned down as well as refusal by the respondents to issue an experience certificate for the aforesaid period.3. Applicant on recommendations of the Staff Selection Committee was appointed as a Junior Resident Doctor to work till 31.7.2004 and admittedly this term was extended for a further period of six months upto 20.1.2005. On an explanation sought, applicant was temporarily taken-off the duties with immediate effect till further orders on 25.11.2004 but the aforesaid order on inquiry was revoked by order dated 6.12.2004. The communication of this letter of resumption of duties was sent to the applicant only on 2.5.2005, as transpired from the order passed by the respondents o...

Delhi Cooperative Tribunal Vs. A.C. Aggarwal

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2006(91)DRJ348

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The monetary claim of a litigant against an officer performing judicial functions has given rise to the present litigation.2. The respondent is a retired IAS officer and in terms of an award dated 23.02.1999 was held liable to pay maintenance/water charges in respect of the Delhi Officers Cooperative House Building Society Limited along with interest.3. The respondent aggrieved by the same filed two appeals under Section 76 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972 (herein-after referred to as the 'Societies Act') in respect of the two cases decided in terms of the award. These petitions were dismissed in limine by Sh. Madan Jha, Delhi Cooperative Tribunal, Delhi in 18.05.1999. The respondent aggrieved by the same filed a writ petition in this Court being Civil Writ Petition No. 1061/2000, but the same was dismissed for non prosecution on 63.03.2003. The respondent took no steps to get the same restored. The respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs 8,000/-...

National Building Construction Corporation Vs. R.C. Bhatia

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2006(91)DRJ259

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. NBCC has filed objections to the award dated 7.7.2004 published by Shri V.R. Vaish, sole arbitrator appointed by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, NBCC to decide the disputes between NBCC and the respondent.2. Respondent (here-in-after referred to as the contractor) is engaged in the business of construction and operates under the name and style M/s Bhatia Builders.3. NBCC awarded various works to the contractor relating to construction of a school building at Jaffarpur Kalan. On 16.9.1994 work relating to construction of a dormitory, kitchen and dining hall was awarded. On 9.3.1995 work pertaining to water supply and sanitary work was awarded. On 23.12.1996, work pertaining to affixing MS angle, affixing kota stone was awarded. On 29.4.1998 and 30.4.1998, work relating to affixing flush doors and grit finish in various walls was awarded.4. In between, certain minor works pertaining to affixing shelves in staff quarters, earth work and re-enforcement etc. were...

Delhi Transport Corporation Indraprastha Estate Vs. Raj Pal S/O Parsad ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 132(2006)DLT681

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 1st October, 2004 passed by the Labour Court-X, Karkardooma Courts whereby the Labour Court directed the reinstatement of the respondent/workman at the post of driver if he was medically fit. If he was not medically fit for the post of driver, directions were given that he be given other lighter duty.2. Briefly, the facts are that the workman/respondent raised an industrial dispute that was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court vide an order dated 11.12.1992 with the following terms of reference:Whether the services of Sh. Raj Pal have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management, and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect3. The facts leading to this reference are that the respondent/workman was working as a driver with the petitioner. He met with an accident on 3.12.1990 and was hospitalized. After accident, when he...

Raj Gariha Vishram Sadan Vs. Vijay Kate

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2007)2LLJ555Del

S. Muralidhar, J.1. This appeal is directed against two orders of a learned Single Judge. By the first impugned order dated 1.8.2005, the learned Single Judge disposed of an application under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (ID Act) being CM No 8620 of 2004 filed by the respondent workman in Writ Petition (C) No. 2768 of 2004 filed by the appellant. The appellant was directed to pay to the respondent workman, from the date of the Award i.e., 1.3.2002 at the highest of the two rates between the last drawn wages and the minimum wages notified by the authorities from time to time. This was made subject to the respondent workman furnishing an undertaking in this Court, along with his latest address, to the effect that in the event of this Court holding in favor of the petitioner, he shall reimburse the differential between the last drawn wages and the amount paid in terms of the orders passed today.2. By the second impugned order dated 27.9.2005 the learned Single Judge di...

Khanna M.R. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2006(111)FLR854]; (2006)IIILLJ1047Del

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this petition, petitioner has prayed that the proceedings initiated by ESI Corporation and Recovery Officer under ESI Act for recovery of the amount due to the corporation from M/s. Black Eye Detection and Security Services Private Limited (for short the 'Company') be quashed and directions be given to ESI Corporation to do recovery from the principal employer and stay the arrest (and recovery proceedings) of the petitioner and award compensation of Rs. 20 lakh to the petitioner for causing mental agony, harassment.2. Briefly, the facts are that the Company was incorporated as a Private Limited Company by family members of the petitioner. In this company petitioner was one of the Directors and his son Ramesh Khanna was the Managing Director. The Company was engaged in employing security guards and detectives and these security guards were deployed as per requirement of their clients. The Company was covered under the ESI Act, However, company failed to dep...

Shri M.R. Khanna S/O Late Sh. B.R. Khanna Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Th ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 133(2006)DLT114

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this petition petitioner has prayed that the proceedings initiated by ESI Corporation and Recovery Officer under ESI Act for recovery of the amount due to the corporation from M/s Black Eye Detection and Security Services Private Limited ( for short the 'Company') be quashed and directions be given to ESI Corporation to do recovery from the principal employer and stay the arrest (and recovery proceedings) of the petitioner and award compensation of Rs.20 lakh to the petitioner for causing mental agony, harassment.2. Briefly, the facts are that the Company was incorporated as a Private Limited Company by family members of the petitioner. In this company petitioner was one of the Directors and his son Ramesh Khanna was the Managing Director. The Company was engaged in employing security guards and detectives and these security guards were deployed as per requirement of their clients. The Company was covered under the ESI Act. However, company failed to depos...

Motor and General Finance Ltd. Vs. Mr. Gautam Roy and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 133(2006)DLT103

ORDER VIIPLAINT(3) Where the subject-matter of the suit is immovable property Where the subject-matter of the suit is immovable property, the plaint shall contain a description of the property sufficient to identify it, and, in case such property can be identified by boundaries or numbers in a record of settlement or survey, the plaint shall specify such boundaries or numbers.7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in Pratibha Singh and Anr. v. Shanti Devi Prasad and Anr. : AIR2003SC643 where in para 17, it has been observed as under:17. When the suit as to immovable property has been decreed and the property is not definitely identified, the defect in the Court record caused by overlooking of provisions contained in O.7. R. 3 and O. 20. R 3 of the C.P.C. is capable of being cured. After all a successful plaintiff should not be deprived of the fruits of decree. Resort can be had to S. 152 or S. 47 of the C.P.C. depending on the facts and circums...

D.T.C. Vs. Anup Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 133(2006)DLT148; (2007)2LLJ340Del

S. Muralidhar, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 10.2.2004 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the appellant's Writ Petition (C) No. 65 of 2002 thereby upholding an order dated 27.4.2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in O.P. No 204/1993.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the respondent was appointed with the appellant Corporation in February 1981 as a conductor. While he was on duty on 29.10.1992 on the bus No. DBP-6458 from Delhi to Ganga Nagar, an Assistant Ticket Inspector (ATI) along with other members of the ticket checking staff boarded the said bus at Sher Pur (Sirsa) and found that four persons were traveling in the bus without tickets. It is the appellant's case that those passengers disclosed that they boarded the bus at Fatehabad for going to Sirsa and had paid Rs. 36/- as fare charges to the respondent who had not issued them tickets. On the basis of the report of the checking staff, the Depot Manager issued a c...